When the act in itself is wrongful the defence of mistake of fact cannot be availed. It was held in an English case

Related MCQs

• Consider the following statements: To justify as a defence to a charge of crime: 1. Irresistible impulse per se is no defence to a charge of crime. 2. Diminished responsibility is a defence to a charge of a crime. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
• Give incorrect response. The following are essentials of defence of mistake of fact under section 76 of the Penal Code:
• Point out incorrect response. The following are some of the illustrations of defence of mistake of fact:
• Assertion (A): Where sister of X was being abducted by force from her parents house by her husband, X caused death of sister’s husband in defence of the sister against an assault with intention of abducting her by force, it was held that the private defence of body extended in the above circumstances to the causing of death. Reason (R): The word abducting in Section 100 IPC includes abduction simpliciter. Direction: The following four items consist of two statements, one labeled the Assertion (A) and the other labeled the Reason (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and decide if the Assertion (A) and the Reason (R) are individually true and if so, whether the reason is a correct explanation of the Assertion. Select your answer to these items using the codes given below and mark your answer sheet accordingly.
• Give best response. A is attacked by a mob who attempt to cause grievous hurt to him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of private defence without firing on the mob and he cannot fire without taking the risk of harming young children who are mingled with the mob. In this case :
• Give correct response. A is attacked by a mob who attempt to murder him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of private defence without firing on the mob and he cannot fire without risk of harming children who are mingled with the mob. One of the children is killed by such firing. In this case:
• Assertion (A): X, because of unsoundness of mind, not knowing the nature of the act attacks Y, who in self-defence and in order to ward of the attack, hits him thereby causing him hurt. Y does not commit an offence. Reason (R): Y had a right of private defence against X under Section 98 of the Indian Penal Code. Of the above statements.
• Assertion (A): A person compelled by threats, from another, which reasonably cause apprehension of his instant death, commits murder of the third person, can plead the defence of compulsion. Reason (R): Consent of the deceased (above 12 years) is a defence to the charge of murder if the act causing death is done in good fait for the benefit of the deceased without intention to kill. Of the above statements.
• Give correct response. A was charged with the murder of his wife, takes the defence of insanity and in the alternative of being drunk at the time of commission of the crime and being thus incapable of forming the intent required in murder. It is also pleaded in defence that the accused was a psychopath. The evidence further discloses that the accused had indicated an intention to kill his wife before taking alcohol. Here :
• Point out incorrect response. The right of private defence of body extends to the causing of death if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right of private defence is of the following description :